Why do marxists and leftist never criticize finance capitalism and the banks and the federal reserve with the same fervor as “sound money” libertarians?
Imho if you really want to radicalize people start talking about fractional reserve banking and inflation, not some amorphous “bourgeoisie”
>>2751055I’m not talking about Marx, I know he wrote some stuff about it I’m specially talking about modern day Marxists
>>2751051>criticizemarxists don't "criticize" which is an external imposition of one's own arbitrary standards, they perform dialectical materialist "immanent critique" where they investigate a system by
its own logic to reveal its
interal contradictions and the resulting evolution that happens as a consequence of it.
Short answer is because communism is Jewish. I’m not even memeing. Marx was an agent of the Rothschildss, he set out to criticize and deconstruct “product” goyish capitalism that actually produces things but leaving the Jewish wing of capitalism (fictitious capital, loans, interest, stocks etc) alone. Modern day communists continue his tradition. You’re not supposed to criticize the chosenites.
>>2751051because it is all capital.
we don't believe in some
good or
productive sectors of capital and some
bad or
unproductive sectors of capital.
social democrats critique healthcare or big pharma, liberals critique the military, conservatives critique education or media, marxists critique capital.
>>2751064>communism is Jewishi love how one wing of reactionaries (neocons) say communism is "anti semitic" and quote the lassalle letter or OTJQ as "proof" and the other wing of reactionaries (neonazis) say communism is "jewish" and quote bakunin's seething schizo melties about marx. but we all know that lassalle is a jewish nigger, and that bakunin has become a monster, a huge mass of flesh and fat.
>>2751064>goyish capitalism that actually produces thingssorry chud, capital outsourced itself to the PRC and now not even "Goyish Capitalism" produces anything. Only Socialism With Chinese Characteristics and Third World Nationalism produces things.
>>2751064FUCK, he knows, the gig is up.
MODS SHUT IT DOWN, SEND THIS KULAK ASS UYGHUR TO SIBERIA.
>>2751059So they
immanently criticize.
communism is the common spinning wheel
>>2751051fuck, he caught us, we actually love central banking
>>2751292andrew jackson seething in hell right now because you said that
>>2751068hmm he stopped replyin
There is an unfortunate tendency of popular talking points in political discourse being enclosured in specific political cuadrants. "Leftists" talk about universal healthcare, workers rights etc all the time because it's our thing but we seem to be forbidden of touching other subjects that can perfectly be engaged from a socialist perspective. What you mention is one, another one is, specifically in the context of the Third World, the problem of development, which the Soviet Union so succesfully tackled and yet our local leftists groups mention so little. Of course there are also, at the same time, popular talking points that are irrational and incompatible with socialist thought and we must simply reject or ignore, like conservative attitudes towards the LGBT and things like that.
I believe more and more that playing along this enclosure is passively accepting the place that the bourgoise political system assigns to (harmless) "leftism". Socialism is supposed to be a universal framework that explains and resignifies every (real) problem that society has, that's the only way of projecting ourselves as a truly trascendent and surpassing worldview instead of just another political ideology but moved closer to the extreme. I've heard Andrew Tate talk about wage labour in exactly the same way we should be doing, we urgently need to take back those issues and unmistakably associate them to the left.
In my country, finance capital is number two on the list of enemies of communism. Number one being agrobusiness.
There is nothing special about finance capital. Demonising it specifically is on the same level as moralistic complaining about usury.
>>2751343>complaining about usuryspeaking of…
the natural rate of interest is the rate of inflation. if you give a guy 8 bucks at 0%, and he gives you 8 bucks back a week later, you lost money, that's cuck behavior. the money literally inflated a little bit in that 1 week. you gotta find out how many cents it inflated and charge him that interest.
>>2751051Inflation was eliminated in the Soviet Union. That's infinitely more than all libertarians put together have ever done. You'd see communists criticizing the financial system if you ever opened a book.
>>2751064PRC produces most things. America is run on debt and real estate investment. I don't know what to tell you.
I find the idea that the market wouldn't beat you over the head over and over if only jews weren't around anymore very funny but also pitiful. The desire for profit growth is the point, as any libertarian would say. Why would a system built on people trying to fuck each other over not lead to everyone being poor except a tiny circle of people who eat children for shit and giggles and to rub it in your face?
>You’re not supposed to criticize the chosenites.I don't know if you are genuinely this deluded. College students today do infinitely more to fight Israel than any libertarian or supposed fascist. Nevermind the Soviet Union that armed Arab countries to fight Israel. Israelis hate the Soviet Union by the way, even though the Red Army broke them out of death camps.
Libertarians are funny little guys I like looking at. At least some of them didn't start screaming Sieg Heil at the top of their lungs when Ukraine popped off. That makes them better than left liberals.
>Imho if you really want to radicalize people start talking about fractional reserve banking and inflation
Idk, why will this radicalize anyone?
>>2751059No, because if that's all it was, they wouldn't pronounce capitalism to be bad. That IS a value judgment no matter what they insist. Objective morality is not a thing.
>>2751051Because Marxists are wedded to Marx, who was critiquing 19th century capitalism which was nowhere near as financialised as modern capitalism. There's no reason you can't expand to it, it's just that a lot of people are simpletons who just want a book to give them all the answers, so they just ask "What did Marx say?" and never go beyond that even if it would be a good idea.
>>2751062And that was Marxists in the 1870s who had the Young Hegelian, Karl Marx arguing with Proudhon and Lasalle, the First International etc in living memory. If half of these people were too retarded to understand theory in the nineteenth century when people actually read books and didn't subsist off corn syrup and aspartame, imagine how retarded the average pimply midwestern third worldist commie LARPer on this website is. Their only engagement with any sort of Western philosophy leading up to their worldview is Fallout NV Dialogue with Caesar (who is literally scripted in the game to be a pseud who sounds smart to whip up a bunch of illiterate tribals)
>>2751394Yall are the reason Mark Fisher killed himself
Unique IPs: 18